Chanukah tells of a powerful story of light over darkness, when a small Hasmonean band of Jewish soldiers defeated a vastly larger, better trained, and better equipped Seleucid (Syrian-Greek) force. As we know, the struggle was not primarily militaristic in nature. The main objective for Mattisyahu, Yehuda, and their followers was to eradicate from their land the Hellenistic culture that had been imposed on them by Antiochus IV.
However, this struggle was also an internal one. Hasmonean forces sought to counter the growing influence of Jewish Hellenists (Misyavnim) who had tried to sway their brethren to embrace and adapt Greek thinking and practice. In effect, this effort became the first organized attempt at reforming Judaism, and would have a widespread impact on the entire nation. This essay seeks to present the history of Hellenism in Judah during this period and identify the primary players in the struggle for the collective Jewish soul.
Our story begins with Alexander the Great, the son of Phillip of Macedon. Leading 45,000 Macedonian and Greek forces, Alexander set out at a young age on world conquest.
Alexander’s foe was the formidable Persian Empire. His forces were vastly outnumbered, sometimes as much as ten to one. The Persians naturally anticipated an easy and decisive victory. Alexander, however, had other ideas. Energetic, well trained, and organized, his forces disposed of the slow and disorganized Persians with surprising ease.
The sudden rise of Greece ushered in a new era, abolishing the old East-West frontier, and swinging the pendulum of world power westward, where it would remain under Greek, Roman, and later, Christian domination. The Jews of Judah, situated in the center of the struggle between East and West, would not escape this transformation unscathed.
The Greek conquests meant more than simply a change in governance. They also represented a cultural invasion. Alexander had been educated in his early years by Aristotle. During that time, he came to greatly admire Greek culture. Alexander was not only interested in expanding his empire; he sought to unify the conquered peoples in the enlightened Greek way of life known as Hellenism.
Alexander envisioned a strong, unified empire and realized that in order to achieve this he would have to bring together all of the empire’s various religious and cultural elements. He thus set out to create Greek-styled cities that would encourage the formation of a cultural melting pot under Hellenistic influence. Local inhabitants were permitted to continue in their ancestral forms of worship and cultural expression while becoming increasingly exposed to Hellenistic wisdom and learning.
Hellenism introduced a concept known as humanism, which places the human being as the center of all things. Hellenism showcased man’s many physical and intellectual talents and glorified the human body. It positioned the discovery of truth and life’s deeper meaning squarely on man’s intellect rather than on the Divine.
Such an outlook was a major shock to many of the societies with which it came into contact. No people, however, would be affected more than the Jews, for whom Hellenism would serve as a destabilizing force unlike any other in our history until modern times.
The following is a partial list of differences that existed between the two groups:
* Belief in a Higher Authority – The Jews were (and are) monotheistic, believing in one all-powerful, omniscient God. The Greeks were polytheistic, worshiping multiple deities.
* Nature of God – The Jewish God was incorporeal, possessing no physical attributes or limitations. He was perfect and holy; Greek gods were human in form, behavior, and interests.
* Morality – The Torah imposes strict guidelines for public and private behavior, with a strong emphasis on modesty and refined social behavior. Greek culture saw no need for such limits. On the contrary, they argued that openness and exposure promoted the beauty of the human body.
* Reward and punishment – The Jews believed that God is interested in human affairs. He rewards good behavior and punishes misdeeds. The Greeks maintained that the gods were not interested in human behavior and left people to their own devices
This conflict did not strike the Jews immediately. Though many Greek coastal colonies had been established, they and their influence remained outside of the immediate realm of the Judean community. The Jewish high priest retained autonomy in the religious and social spheres – a state of affairs that would serve as a precedent for future high priests during the reign of the Hasmoneans.
* * * * *
Alexander died suddenly, with no clear order of succession. As a result, the vast and diverse empire dissolved rapidly. A series of wars followed to determine the future of the Greek Empire. When the dust settled, the empire was divided into the following segments:
* Antigonus Gonatas settled on Macedonia and the league of Greek cities that were subject to the crown.
* Seleucus I Nicator held a reduced portion of the former Persian Empire, the largest and easternmost segment of Alexander’s former empire. Its vastness would prove difficult to effectively govern.
* Ptolemy I Soter won Egypt and parts of North Africa. He later captured Judah as well, which his dynasty would hold for over a century.
* The remainder of the former empire became independent states.
As noted, Ptolemy I first emerged from the post-Alexandrian struggle with an empire consisting of Egypt and parts of North Africa. However, he was not satisfied with this territory. He wanted Judah as well.
Despite its relative smallness, Judah was of vital significance to both the Egyptian and the Syrian rulers. It separated their territories from one another, thus serving as a buffer area to protect against foreign invasions. It was also of great economic importance in terms of its own productivity and as a transit station for imports from Greece and the Aegean Islands. Both dynasties naturally laid claim to the land.
The struggle that would ensue over the next hundred years caused immense suffering to the people of Judah whose land would play host to a myriad of battles and a permanent military presence, disturbing their social, economic, and religious lives.
Greek hegemony meant increased Hellenistic influence in the country. Prior to Alexander’s annexation, Greek colonists were relatively few in number and had limited their scope of influence to the coast. They did not penetrate the internal areas occupied by the Jews and Samaritans. Beginning in the reign of Ptolemy I, however, their span of influence widened. Cities such as Gadara and Philadelphia (modern day Amman) in Trans-Jordan and Beth-Shean in Samaria took on a strong Greek flavor. They joined the coastal cities Ashkelon, Acco, and others in tightening the Hellenistic noose around the Jewish heartland. Increased trade between the Jews and Greeks also helped strengthen their contact.
On the whole, the Jewish populace in Judah successfully resisted these Hellenistic inroads. This was by no means a trivial accomplishment. The vast majority of conquered peoples outside of Israel willingly allowed themselves to be Hellenized. Only the Jews’ ever-present drive and sense of mission kept them from following suit.
But there were exceptions. A growing percentage of Jews, primarily from the upper classes, began to progressively embrace aspects of Hellenistic culture. First, they adopted certain external trappings, including speaking the Greek language, participating in Greek festivals, and using Greek names.
Eventually, their alienation increased. These Jews began to act in direct opposition to the mandates of the Torah. Leading the charge was a group of people called the Tzadukim and Bysusim (Sadducees and Boethusians) who, as a result of significant Greek influence, would come to reject three primary Jewish principles. These principles were the concept of Divine reward and punishment, the existence of an Afterlife, and the validity of the Oral Law.
* * * * *
The great sage Antigonus of Socho, a student of Shimon HaTzaddik, lived during the early stages of Ptolemaic domination. One of his many teachings is recorded in Tractate Avos (1:3):
Do not be like servants who serve their master in order to receive a reward, but be like servants who do not serve their master in order to receive a reward; and let the fear of Heaven be upon you.
Two of Antignos’s students, Tzadok and Bysus, were heavily influenced by the growing appeal of Greek culture. With deliberate intent they chose to misinterpret the words of their teacher to support their newfound inclinations. They elected not to understand his maxim at face value, as an admonishment to serve God strictly on its own merits. Rather, they concluded that the rabbis considered it unwise to serve God with the expectation of receiving a reward, because there simply was no reward to receive.
[Tzadok and Bysus] taught their disciples who repeated it to their disciples…and said to them, “What caused our forefathers to say this? Is it possible that a worker should labor all day and not receive his reward in the evening? Therefore, had they known of the existence of the world to come and the resurrection of the dead, they would not have said this. [Avos D’Rabbi Nosson 5:13]
Of course, the exact opposite was true. Antigonus and the sages took the existence of an Afterlife for granted. Ideally, however, it was not intended as the primary motivator for fulfilling God’s commandments.
Underlying such teaching was the desire to rid oneself of the shackles imposed by the Jewish notion of s’char v’onesh, or reward and punishment. The Jews have always believed in a God who cares, who takes all thoughts and deeds into consideration, and responds accordingly.
Greek ideology, on the other hand, wished to break free from such restrictive thought. In spite of their tremendous intellectual and cultural advances, the Greeks maintained a primitive religious system centered on physical, sinful deities, which encouraged the unbridled pursuit of hedonistic pleasures. They rejected the very notion of an Afterlife because they wanted nothing to do with a God who takes account of human behavior. By misinterpreting their teacher’s words, Tzadok and Bysus sought to likewise free themselves to act without the moral constrictions imposed by the Torah.
One other ingredient was vital in sustaining this new approach to Judaism: rejecting the Oral Law. The Oral Law is replete with references to life in the next world. It would have been impossible for the Sadducees to maintain their aforementioned positions while attesting to the validity of our Oral tradition. In addition, acceptance of the Oral Law meant fostering a dependency upon the sages, something the Sadducees were less than eager to do.
* * * * *
We noted that Hellenistic culture had begun to influence a growing percentage of Judean Jewry.
Many pious Jews strongly isolated themselves from Greek culture. Some would even go into hiding to avoid the new social pressure. Those in the middle, fervently religious Jews who formed the majority of the population, elected to leave governmental affairs to the Greeks but still conducted themselves as loyal citizens. They simply refused to embrace the external trappings of Hellenism, choosing instead to cling to their Jewish traditions.
Still, a sizable percentage of the population, particularly the upper classes and priests, chose outright assimilation. They indulged in the imported Greek culture, visiting gymnasiums and conducting business with Hellenistic names. Ironically, these Jews often helped accelerate the hellenization process more than the Greeks themselves.
This last group was driven by three distinct aims. Most were motivated by secular and economic causes. They saw Hellenism as their first-class ticket to new opportunities for social mobility and wealth.
A smaller faction was inspired by an appreciation of the external beauty promoted by Hellenism. The grandeur of Greek architecture, in the form of theaters, stadiums, and gymnasiums, captured their passions. So did the Greeks’ artistic and cultural expression, and their strong emphasis on philosophical debate.
Still others tried, like their brethren in Alexandria, to synthesize the universalistic concepts inherent in monotheism, which identifies God as the father and protector of all humanity, with the uniform Hellenistic culture that the Greeks were aiming to establish throughout their empire.
They argued that just as one God oversees the deeds of all men, so too should one set of cultural norms and values be collectively accepted. In order to achieve this challenging goal, they attempted to reduce the Torah to its ethical core, focusing less on the strict letter of the commandments and more on the ideas that lay behind them. (Paul and other early Christians, themselves Jews, would use a similar approach as they attempted to broaden Christianity’s appeal in the first century CE.)
The obvious problem is that such synthesis is naturally impossible. As listed above, there were far too many fundamental differences dividing the two groups. Religiously, philosophically, morally, and otherwise, the Jews and Greeks had more that separated them than bound them together.
In addition, while Judaism maintains God’s role as father and protector of all humanity, it is far from a universalistic religion. Judaism is often quite particularistic. It ascribes a position of chosenness to the Jewish people, demanding much more of them in terms of Torah and mitzvah observance than it does of their gentile counterparts. Certainly, God created and loves all humankind. That does not mean, however, that He assigned the same roles to all.
Perhaps the most painful aspect of the war that would ultimately follow was that it not just a battle against the Greeks; it was a civil war as well. Jews loyal to Judaism fought against Jews who had become Hellenized and sided with the Greeks. Those who remained loyal to their religious tradition would become known as the chassidim, or pious ones. They were nationalistic in their quest to preserve their religious and, eventually, political independence. The anti-national Hellenists, on the other hand, were willing to sacrifice the very core of their religion and nationality in order to achieve their assimilatory goals.
